11 U.S.C. § 523

Section 523(a)(7) keeps a state criminal restitution debt from discharge even when its exact amount remains undetermined.

Rhode Island Depositors Economic Protection Corp. v. LaRoche (In Re LaRoche) · filed 1997-04-18(a)(7)

We agree with DEPCO’s contention that the state court restitution order is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7). Accordingly, although judgment may not enter for a specific amount at this time, we do rule now that Mr. LaRoehe’s liability for the debt in question survives the bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(7) makes False Claims Act treble damages nondischargeable when they are penal rather than compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

United States v. Cassidy (In Re Cassidy) · filed 1997-06-30(a)(7)

The treble damages imposed by that Act are penal in nature, as opposed to being compensation for actual pecuniary loss. Thus, Plaintiffs claim for treble damages under the False Claims Act is nondischargeable, as well, under § 523(a)(7), which provides for nondischargeability of a debt which is a “fine, penalty, or forfeiture payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit, and is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss ...”

Section 523(a)(7) excepts government fines, penalties, and forfeitures from discharge only when they do not compensate actual pecuniary loss.

City of Kansas v. Taylor · filed 1997-08-13(a)(7)

Section 523(a)(7) provides an exception to discharge to the extent that the subject debt is for a fine, penalty or forfeiture payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit and is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss. The amount which the jury awarded the City in the eminent domain proceeding cannot be -characterized as a fine or a penalty, nor does it arise from a forfeiture.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts fines, penalties, and forfeitures from discharge when they are payable to a governmental unit and do not compensate for pecuniary loss.

In Re Games · filed 1997-10-10(a)(7)

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) sets forth the exceptions to discharge for all chapters except Chapter 13, with regard to fines. By virtue of that provision, debts which are for 1) fines, penalties and forfeitures, 2) payable to a governmental unit and 3) are not compensation for pecuniary loss are excepted from discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts state criminal restitution from discharge, including a civil consent judgment to the extent it is incorporated into the restitution order.

North American Science Associates, Inc. v. Clark (In Re Clark) · filed 1997-12-05(a)(7)

Criminal restitution was ordered, and it is nondischargeable. Thus, to the extent the consent judgment was incorporated in the restitution order, it is nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a civil restitution debt from discharge when the order serves the state's interest in punishment rather than compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

In Re Towers · filed 1998-01-30(a)(7)

Applying the guidelines developed above, we find that the overriding purpose of this restitution order was to vindicate the State's interest in punishing wrongdoing, not to directly compensate the victims of Towers' fraudulent activities. As such, we find that the civil restitution order at issue in this case is not dischargeable under § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts civil racketeering disgorgement from discharge when it benefits the government and does not compensate its actual pecuniary loss; the three-year limit for tax penalties does not apply.

Arizona v. Ott (In Re Ott) · filed 1998-03-10(a)(7)

All three criteria of the Seals analysis, and all three elements of § 523(a)(7), are satisfied. ... The three year limit does not apply.

Section 523(a)(7) excludes criminal fines and nuisance-abatement expenses imposed as punishment from discharge.

City of Toledo v. Rayford, Unpublished Decision (5-1-1998) · filed 1998-05-01(a)(7)

Likewise, the fines and conditions of appellant's probation in this case are punishment for failure to comply with an order to abate a public nuisance. Because they are a criminal penalty, the fines and any funds expended in the abatement of the nuisance are not, under the circumstances of this case, dischargeable debts.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a governmental penalty from discharge when it benefits the government and does not compensate for actual pecuniary loss, even if its amount was set by agreement.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation v. Lee (In Re Lee) · filed 1998-06-15(a)(7)

Its purpose was to serve as a penalty whose enforcement could be used to preclude Lee’s reentry into the oil and gas business. As a penalty which provides no compensation for actual pecuniary loss, this judgment is rendered non-dis-chargeable under section 523(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(17) excepts from discharge only fees, costs, and expenses imposed or assessed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) or (f).

Walker v. Tuttle (In Re Tuttle) · filed 1998-09-08(a)(17)

Because it is undisputed that the fees, costs, and expenses represented by the Judgment were imposed upon the Debtors pursuant to Michigan’s offer of judgment procedure, and were not assessed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) or (f), the debt represented by the Judgment is dischargeable, notwithstanding 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(17).

Section 523(a)(7) requires a creditor to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that a restitution debt meets the exception’s requirements.

Mabey v. Ellis (In Re Ellis) · filed 1998-09-23(a)(7)

It is Plaintiffs burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the restitution order satisfies the requirements of Section 523(a)(7). ... Because she failed to do so, Defendants’ obligations are not excepted from their bankruptcy discharge under Section 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) makes the penalty for an early withdrawal from a qualified retirement account nondischargeable when it does not compensate for actual pecuniary loss and neither tax-penalty exception applies.

Mounier v. United States (In Re Mounier) · filed 1998-10-06(a)(7)

Given the foregoing, the Court finds that the obligation imposed pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 72(t) is a nondischargeable penalty under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts from discharge a criminal sentence’s incarceration fee when the fee is penal rather than compensation for actual loss.

Carlisle County Fiscal Court v. Maxwell (In Re Maxwell) · filed 1998-12-17(a)(7)

In conclusion, in light of both the history of Bankruptcy Courts’ deference to criminal judgments and the interest of the State of Kentucky in unfettered administration of its criminal justice system, the Court finds the cost of incarceration to be nondischargeable. Accordingly, the Court will by separate Order enter a Judgment on behalf of the Plaintiff, Carlisle County Fiscal Court, determining the debt owed to it by Debtor/Defendant, Thomas L. Maxwell, to be nondischargeable under § 523(a)(7) in the amount of $7,017.50.

Section 523(a)(17) excepts court-assessed attorney fees and costs from discharge even when the debtor is not a prisoner.

Fry v. Hough (In Re Hough) · filed 1998-12-18(a)(17)

Affording the language used by Congress in the Bankruptcy Code provision its plain meaning, then, attorneys fees and costs assessed by a court against a nonprisoner litigant, who later seeks bankruptcy relief, are clearly excepted from bankruptcy discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) does not prevent discharge of civil restitution collected by a government for distribution to fraud victims.

In the Matter of James Towers, Debtor-Appellant. State of Illinois · filed 1999-01-12(a)(7)

Civil restitution under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act is payable to, but not for the benefit of, the Attorney General of Illinois. It is therefore not protected from discharge by 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts civil penalties from discharge when they are payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit and do not compensate for actual pecuniary loss.

Idaho v. Edwards (In Re Edwards) · filed 1999-04-05(a)(7)

The statute thus makes it clear that ICPA penalties are paid to the State of Idaho, are used for the benefit of the State, and are not directly related to any actual pecuniary loss of the claimants. Thus, the penalties imposed upon Edwards for ICPA violations are excepted from discharge in bankruptcy under Bankruptcy Code Section 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts tax debts owed to the IRS as restitution for criminal tax evasion from discharge as fines.

Rinker v. United States (In Re Rinker) · filed 1999-03-16(a)(7)

I further concluded that such obligations, being a tax debt owed to the IRS pursuant to a restitution order resulting from a criminal conviction for tax evasion, is nondischargeable as a “fine” under § 523(a)(7). ... This conclusion is equally applicable here.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a surety’s forfeited bail bond obligation from discharge when it is payable to the government and does not compensate for pecuniary loss.

United States v. Zamora · filed 1999-03-31(a)(7)

Applying the statute to this factual setting, the obligation is a forfeiture payable to and for the benefit of a governmental entity that is not compensation for pecuniary loss. The obligation is non-discharge-able under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a professional bail bondsman’s contractual surety obligation from discharge because the obligation is not essentially penal.

Virginia v. Collins (In re Collins) · filed 1999-04-05(a)(7)

We therefore conclude that Mr. Collins’s bail bond debt arose from a contractual obligation and was not a “fine, penalty, or forfeiture” within the meaning of § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a restitution obligation imposed as a consequence of a prison disciplinary conviction from discharge, whether the obligation is called a punishment or a condition.

Wisconsin v. Cole (In Re Cole) · filed 1999-04-23(a)(7)

Using the Thompson holding as a basis for analogy, the debtor’s restitution obligation, whether a punishment or condition, was only imposed on him as a consequence of his conviction and thus, without reference to additional facts, may be determined to be nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) generally excepts municipal traffic fines from discharge in Chapter 7.

In Re Raphael · filed 1999-08-11(a)(7)

A careful review of the case law on the dischargeability of municipal court traffic ordinance violations reveals that, in a Chapter 7 case, the fines are excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523, while in a Chapter 13 case, such fines are generally payable through a Chapter 13 plan.

Section 523(a)(7) requires a governmental unit to receive a monetary benefit from a penalty payment for the debt to be excepted from discharge.

Kish v. Farmer (In Re Kish) · filed 1999-08-30(a)(7)

Thus the test under this element of Code section 523(a)(7) is whether a governmental unit receives a monetary benefit from the payment in question.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts restitution imposed as part of a criminal sentence from discharge.

Cummins v. Ray (In re Ray) · filed 1999-09-03(a)(7)

There are no facts in dispute in the present case, and the Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law, declaring the restitution award ordered by Jefferson District Court a nondischargeable obligation under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(17) excepts from discharge only fees and costs imposed on prisoner litigants under the federal in forma pauperis statute.

Hough v. Fry (In Re Hough) · filed 1999-09-10(a)(17)

The bankruptcy court erred in its conclusion that attorneys’ fees and costs here awarded pursuant to Idaho statute were excepted from discharge. Section § 523(a)(17) applies only to fees and costs imposed on prisoner litigants under the federal in forma pauperis statute.

Section 523(a)(7) covers obligations imposed as punishment for the debtor’s wrongdoing, but not a surety’s contractual obligation on a forfeited bail bond.

City of Philadelphia v. Nam (In Re Nam) · filed 1999-12-08(a)(7)

I am persuaded that under Pennsylvania law, a surety’s obligation on a bail bond is a contractual obligation and, therefore, civil in nature. The obligation arises because a condition of the bond was breached and not because the surety is being punished. Accordingly, the Debtor’s obligation on the bail bond is not within the scope of § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except pre-October 1998 criminal restitution from discharge when the money is ultimately payable to private victims rather than a governmental unit.

In Re: Abdur Amin Rashid · filed 2000-04-14(a)(7)

Accordingly, we find that Rashid's restitution obligation is not exempt from discharge pursuant to S 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) distinguishes punitive fines payable to a governmental unit from sanctions that compensate actual pecuniary loss.

Lenke v. Tischler (In Re Lenke) · filed 2000-05-17(a)(7)

Unlike the Court-made exception to the § 362(b)(1) exception to the automatic stay that the Ninth Circuit eliminated in Gruntz, the discharge exception contains a statutory basis for the distinction between a punitive or remedial “fine, penalty or forfeiture” payable to a governmental unit and one that is “compensation for actual pecuniary loss.” 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except criminal restitution payable to private victims from discharge when the money is not payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit.

In re Abdur Amin Rashid · filed 2000-06-23(a)(7)

Similarly, we would pervert the clear, unambiguous language of S 523(a)(7) if we found that Rashid's restitution obligation was "payable to" a governmental unit. ... Accordingly, we find that Rashid's restitution obligation is not exempt from discharge pursuant to S 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a civil forfeiture from discharge when it benefits a governmental unit and does not compensate for actual pecuniary loss.

Thaler v. County of Nassau District Attorney (In Re Wolfson) · filed 2001-04-02(a)(7)

Since the forfeited funds in this case qualify as forfeitures payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit and are not compensation for actual pecuniary loss, this Court finds that such funds, even if considered to be property of the estate under section 541(a), are nondischargeable under section 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except California State Bar disciplinary costs from discharge when they compensate the Bar for actual pecuniary loss.

In Re: Timothy L. Taggart, Debtor. The State Bar of California v. Taggart · filed 2001-05-10(a)(7)

In this case, we must decide whether the costs of attorney disciplinary proceedings brought by the State Bar of California (State Bar) are dischargeable in Chapter 7 bankruptcy, or instead are excluded from discharge by § 523(a)(7). Because we conclude that, in California, such costs are compensation to the State Bar for “actual pecuniary loss” rather than “fine[s], penalties], or forfeiture[s],” we reverse the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel and remand with instruction to discharge the appellant’s debt to the State Bar.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a forfeiture from discharge only when it is imposed because of the debtor’s misconduct or wrongdoing.

Hickman v. Texas (In Re Hickman) · filed 2001-07-26(a)(7)

We hold that § 523(a)(7) excludes only those forfeitures imposed because of misconduct or wrongdoing by the debtor.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts criminal restitution from discharge even when it later becomes enforceable as a civil judgment.

Warfel v. City of Saratoga (In Re Warfel) · filed 2001-08-15(a)(7)

The civil restitution judgment in favor of the City was a means of enforcing a sentence imposed on the debtor under California's criminal justice system. Therefore, it was nondischargeable under the provisions of § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a family surety’s forfeited bail bond debt from Chapter 7 discharge even when the forfeiture is not penal.

In Re: Gi Nam v. · filed 2001-11-20(a)(7)

The instant appeal is distinguishable from Kelly insofar as "forfeitures" -- the type of obligation alleged to be at issue -- are excepted expressly from discharge by S 523(a)(7). Because S 523(a)(7) expressly excepts forfeitures without regard to penal nature, we need not address this characteristic in assessing the applicability of S 523(a)(7) to Nam's alleged forfeiture.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a family surety’s bail bond forfeiture from discharge when it is payable to a government and does not compensate a pecuniary loss, even if it is not penal.

In Re: Gi Nam · filed 2001-12-06(a)(7)

Because S 523(a)(7) expressly excepts forfeitures without regard to penal nature, we need not address this characteristic in assessing the applicability of S 523(a)(7) to Nam's alleged forfeiture.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts from discharge a fine payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit that does not compensate for actual pecuniary loss.

State v. Nevers, Unpublished Decision (10-24-2002) · filed 2002-10-24(a)(7)

Additionally, even assuming this was a debt subject to the bankruptcy proceedings, 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(7) provides that a discharge under Chapter 7 does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt "to the extent such debt is for a fine, penalty, or forfeiture payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit, and is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss." ... In the instant case, it cannot be disputed that this is a fine payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit and is not compensation for any pecuniary loss by such governmental entities or any other party.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a debt from discharge when it is payable to private victims as compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

Olson v. McNabb (In Re McNabb) · filed 2003-01-07(a)(7)

The Plaintiffs are not a governmental unit and the debt they seek to except from the debtor’s discharge is apparently compensation for actual pecuniary loss. Therefore, § 523(a)(7), by its express language, is not applicable to Plaintiffs and they may not utilize it to except the debt the Defendant owes to them from discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts criminal restitution from discharge when it serves the state's penal interests, even if a private victim or insurer receives payment.

Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Mills (In Re Mills) · filed 2003-03-26(a)(7)

Based upon the above and foregoing, this Court concludes that the restitution debt is: (1) for a fine, penalty, or forfeiture, (2) in effect, payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit, and (3) not compensation for an actual pecuniary loss. As a consequence, it is not dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except criminal restitution payable directly to a private creditor from discharge, even if the restitution is penal in nature.

National Auto Sales, Inc. v. Wilson (In Re Wilson) · filed 2003-05-14(a)(7)

Even if the restitution is considered penal in nature and thus not reimbursement for actual pecuniary loss, it remains reimbursement for the benefit of a non-governmental creditor. Therefore, the debt cannot be excepted from discharge under § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts interest on a state criminal penalty from discharge when the interest is part of the criminal sanction.

State v. Cunningham · filed 2003-05-22(a)(7)

That interest then inheres in the penalty for purposes of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) and is not dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a debt from discharge when the government is only a contingent beneficiary of the payment.

Pulley v. Legreide (In Re Pulley) · filed 2003-06-25(a)(7)

Given this background, this court cannot consider the State as anything but a contingent beneficiary of the DMV surcharges — a status not sufficient on the face of § 523(a)(7) to justify that exception to discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except restitution from discharge when a government agency forwards the payments to private victims.

Verola v. Colton (In Re Verola) · filed 2003-07-08(a)(7)

In the instant case, it is clear from the specific language in the restitution order that the benefit, the money, is to be forwarded to the victims. Thus, the second requirement to establish that a debt is excepted from discharge under § 523(a)(7), that the debt be “payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit,” is not met.

Section 523(a)(7) does not prevent discharge of a professional bail bondsman’s contractual bail bond forfeiture debt.

Geeslin v. Skandalakis (In Re Geeslin) · filed 2003-07-17(a)(7)

The contractual nature of the bond forfeiture and significant policy factors weigh in Debtor’s favor. Therefore, the Court finds that debts incurred by Debtor through his professional bail bonding company were discharged.

Section 523(a)(7) allows discharge of a surcharge collected by the state when its proceeds must pay private creditors and only a possible surplus benefits the state.

Legreide v. Pulley (In Re Pulley) · filed 2003-12-31(a)(7)

The Court disagrees, and finds that the DMV surcharges are not payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit, and that the surcharges do not meet the 523(a)(7) standard.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts from discharge fines and penalties payable to a governmental unit that serve a punitive purpose rather than compensate for actual pecuniary loss.

Nebraska Ex Rel. Linder v. Strong (In Re Strong) · filed 2004-02-23(a)(7)

In addition, the fine or penalty assessed by the district court is a debt payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit. There is no evidence that it constitutes compensation for actual pecuniary loss. Thus, the bankruptcy court’s holding that § 523(a)(7) excepts the pre-petition fine and penalty debts from discharge was correct.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts punitive fines and penalties payable to a governmental unit from discharge when they do not compensate for actual pecuniary loss.

State of Nebraska v. Strong · filed 2004-02-23(a)(7)

In addition, the fine or penalty assessed by the district court is a debt payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit. There is no evidence that it constitutes compensation for actual pecuniary loss. Thus, the bankruptcy court’s holding that § 523(a)(7) excepts the pre-petition fine and penalty debts from discharge was correct.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a governmental penalty from discharge when it punishes violations rather than compensates for an actual loss.

State v. Williamson · filed 2004-06-24(a)(7)

As such, the penalty in this case falls squarely within the exception to the discharge contained in 11 USC § 523 (a) (7) (see In re Strong, 305 BR 292, 296-297 [Bank App 2004]).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts state court criminal restitution from discharge, even when the restitution is paid to a private victim.

Thompson v. Hewitt · filed 2004-07-09(a)(7)

Once the restitution order was enacted by the NJ Court, its dischargeability is subject to the requirements of Section 523(a)(7), which renders court-imposed criminal restitution non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts state criminal restitution from discharge even when the payments are forwarded to victims.

Verola v. Colton (In Re Verola) · filed 2004-08-16(a)(7)

The Court disagrees with the Bankruptcy Court’s interpretation of the law surrounding the dischargeability of state criminal restitution orders. Although in Kelly, the governmental unit kept the restitution, this was not the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision. The Supreme Court argued that the restitution was “payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit,” because restitution orders, although “forwarded to the victim,” operate for the benefit of the State.

Section 523(a)(7) generally excludes civil contempt sanctions imposed to uphold a court's dignity and authority from discharge.

Hansbrough v. Birdsell · filed 2004-10-29(a)(7)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7), civil contempt sanctions are generally non-dischargeable where, as here, they are imposed to uphold the dignity and authority of the court.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts an attorney disciplinary cost judgment from discharge when the costs are a penalty payable to a governmental unit rather than compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Smith (In Re Smith) · filed 2004-11-12(a)(7)

Because this Court finds that the Commission is a governmental unit, and that the judgment for costs is a penalty and not compensation for actual pecuniary loss, the debt is nondis-chargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts restitution ordered in a state criminal proceeding from discharge when it is a penal sanction payable to a governmental entity.

State v. Garnett · filed 2004-12-22(a)(7)

In the case at bar, the restitution was ordered in a criminal proceeding against Garnett, which is consistent with Kelly, so that it was a non-dischargeable debt pursuant to Section 523(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts state criminal restitution orders from Chapter 7 discharge even when payments go to an individual victim.

In Re Thompson · filed 2005-08-11(a)(7)

Given the many opportunities the Court passed to refer to “government victims” in this section, Kelly strongly suggests that, indeed, § 523(a)(7) excepts from discharge all state criminal restitution orders, regardless of whether the payments are made to governmental units or individuals.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts restitution imposed as part of a state criminal sentence from Chapter 7 discharge even when the victim is private and the obligation is converted to a civil judgment.

Utah v. Troff (In Re Troff) · filed 2005-08-15(a)(7)

Having heard and considered the arguments advanced by counsel, and having reviewed the briefs and record in this case as well as the pertinent authorities, this Court hereby reverses the bankruptcy court’s order and holds that pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) as construed in light of Kelly, Troffs restitution obligation imposed as part of his state court criminal sentence is excepted from discharge in his Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts bail bond forfeitures entered against a commercial bail bondsman from discharge.

Dobrek v. Phelan · filed 2005-08-17(a)(7)

Because we read the text of § 523(a)(7) to encompass the type of bail bond debts at issue here, and because we are persuaded by the reasoning in Gi Nam, we hold that § 523(a)(7) excepts from discharge bail bond forfeitures entered against a commercial bail bondsman.

Section 523(a)(7) makes punitive sanctions awarded to a state governmental unit for vexatious and frivolous litigation nondischargeable.

Bryfogle v. Kartchner · filed 2005-12-13(a)(7)

The debts in question were three separate punitive sanctions awarded to the Arizona Board of Regents against Bryfogle for vexatious and frivolous litigation. Because the Board of Regents is a governmental unit of the state of Arizona, see Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 15-1625(3), the district court properly concluded these debts were non-dischargeable, see 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7); Warfel v. City of Saratoga (In re Warfel), 268 B.R. 205, 210 (9th Cir.BAP, 2001).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a debtor’s indemnity obligation to a private bail bond agency from discharge when the agency seeks reimbursement for its monetary loss on a forfeited bond.

Empire Bonding Agency v. Lopes (In Re Lopes) · filed 2006-03-21(a)(7)

The Court need not weigh in on the disagreement among the circuit courts on the nuances of penal sanctions versus forfeitures generally as it is unnecessary to the ultimate resolution of this issue, in that Plaintiff is not a governmental agency, and is seeking reimbursement for money paid, two factors which prevent Plaintiff from seeking a determination of non-dischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts state-imposed criminal restitution from Chapter 7 discharge even when the payments are forwarded to victims.

Colton v. Verola · filed 2006-04-20(a)(7)

Because the Supreme Court’s holding in Kelly, that § 523(a)(7) makes all state-imposed criminal restitution obligations non- dischargeable, is still the law of the land, we AFFIRM.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts contempt sanctions from discharge when they uphold a court’s authority, even if they are payable to another litigant.

Boscaino v. Travis (In Re Travis) · filed 2006-08-31(a)(7)

This is true even if, as is the situation here, the sanctions are payable to a party-litigant, as opposed to a governmental unit; the only prerequisite: that the sanctions have been imposed to uphold the dignity and authority of the court.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts attorney disciplinary costs from discharge when they serve penal and rehabilitative purposes and are not compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

New Hampshire Supreme Court Professional Conduct Committee v. Richmond (In Re Richmond) · filed 2006-09-28(a)(7)

For the reasons stated above, the Court concludes that the Debtor’s obligation to pay the Disciplinary Costs to the Committee falls within the provisions of § 523(a)(7) as it is a debt “for a fine, penalty or forfeiture payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit, and is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss.” Accordingly, the Debtor’s obligations to the Committee arising out of Richmond I and Richmond II are non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a penalty from discharge only if it is payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit and does not compensate for actual pecuniary loss.

Hughes v. Sanders · filed 2006-11-13(a)(7)

In order for Hughes to prevail here, therefore, we must determine whether the judgment set out in the complaint is “payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit” and whether it is compensation for actual pecuniary loss. The answers to those questions are clear. The judgment is payable to Hughes, who is not a governmental unit, and it is in an amount calculated to compensate Hughes for the damage he incurred as a result of Sanders’s malpractice.

Section 523(a)(7) makes traffic-conviction surcharges nondischargeable when they benefit a governmental unit and do not compensate it for actual pecuniary loss.

In Re Holder · filed 2006-12-01(a)(7)

The court finds that monies paid into the general revenue fund are for the benefit of the state, which is a governmental unit, and are not paid to the Department of Public Safety or the Comptroller for any "actual pecuniary loss" incurred. Thus, the court finds that these monies are nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts criminal restitution from discharge even when the victim receives the proceeds.

Reif v. Kaster (In Re Reif) · filed 2007-02-12(a)(7)

Because the Restitution Judgment is part of a criminal judgment, it is non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7), regardless of who receives the restitution proceeds.

Section 523(a)(7) prevents discharge of restitution imposed as part of a state criminal sentence, even when the payments go to a private victim.

In re Troff · filed 2007-03-15(a)(7)

This appeal raises the question of whether 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) permits a debtor in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding to discharge a restitution obligation imposed as part of a state criminal sentence and payable to a private individual. Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and (d), we affirm the district court and hold that the debt is not dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a contractual bail bond indemnity debt owed to a private bonding company from discharge when the debt compensates the company for its loss.

Corrales v. Sanchez (In Re Sanchez) · filed 2007-03-28(a)(7)

Sanchez’ debt to plaintiff does not meet any of the three statutory requirements. (1) The debt is not a “fine,” nor is it a “penalty,” nor is it a “forfeiture” under any normal and customary definition of those words. It is a simple contract obligation based upon the Agreement of Indemnity which Sanchez signed.

Section 523(a)(7) prevents discharge of restitution imposed as part of a state criminal sentence, even when the payments go to a private victim.

Troff v. State of Utah · filed 2007-05-07(a)(7)

This appeal raises the question of w hether 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) permits a debtor in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding to discharge a restitution obligation imposed as part of a state criminal sentence and payable to a private individual. Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and (d), we affirm the district court and hold that the debt is not dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a guarantor’s debt to a private bail bondsman from discharge when the debt is not payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit.

Affordable Bail Bonds, Inc. v. Sandoval (In Re Sandoval) · filed 2008-09-11(a)(7)

It is unnecessary, however, for us to decide that question because this debt is not payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit, and thus the statute does not bar discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts attorney disciplinary cost assessments from discharge when they serve deterrent and rehabilitative purposes rather than a purely compensatory purpose.

Richmond v. New Hampshire Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct · filed 2008-09-19(a)(7)

The cost assessments levied in Richmond I and Richmond II are thus non- dischargeable under § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) requires the bankruptcy court to assess the character of a debt, without redetermining whether the debtor violated the underlying law.

Colorado Ex Rel. Salazar v. Jensen (In Re Jensen) · filed 2008-09-30(a)(7)

But nothing in this line of inquiry requires or even allows the bankruptcy court to determine whether the debtor did in fact violate a law, giving rise to the imposition of a fine, penalty or forfeiture.

Section 523(a)(7) leaves a governmental penalty nondischargeable but permits discharge of an obligation reimbursing the government for actual remediation costs.

Granger v. Maine Department of Environmental Protection (In Re Granger) · filed 2008-10-09(a)(7)

Although the Grangers’ obligation to pay the portion of the remediation/reimbursement debt owing at the bankruptcy filing is discharged, the $40,000 penalty portion is not discharged.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts California State Bar disciplinary costs imposed under the 2003 amendments from discharge.

State Bar v. Findley (In Re Findley) · filed 2010-02-01(a)(7)

In this appeal, we consider whether § 523(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code protects from discharge attorney disciplinary costs imposed under California law. Pursuant to the 2003 amendments to the California Business and Professions Code, we conclude that the costs imposed are non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a criminal restitution order from discharge when it is a penalty payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit and is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

United Building Centers v. Ochs · filed 2010-03-31(a)(7)

Penal sanctions, whether designated as fines, penalties, or forfeitures, are exempted from discharge under 11 USC § 523 (a)(7) when made payable “to and for the benefit of a governmental unit,” and are “not compensation for actual pecuniary loss.”

Section 523(a)(7) excepts prison disciplinary restitution from discharge when the debt is punishment rather than compensation for pecuniary loss.

In Re Reimann · filed 2010-09-27(a)(7)

Consequently, this debt is in the nature of restitution and punishment, not compensation for pecuniary loss, so it is excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) automatically excepts criminal restitution for a prepetition crime from discharge, even when the restitution order is entered after discharge.

Williams v. Meyer (In Re Williams) · filed 2010-11-09(a)(7)

Because § 523(a)(7) is self-executing — that is, it does not require either party to obtain a judgment declaring the debt excepted from discharge — the State of Colorado’s right to impose restitution as part of a sentence upon conviction of a prepetition crime (and the Meyers’ right to benefit from such restitution) was automatically excepted from Williams’s discharge under § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except Tennessee attorney disciplinary costs from discharge when they compensate the disciplinary board for actual pecuniary loss.

Love v. Scott (In Re Love) · filed 2011-01-12(a)(7)

The issue is whether costs assessed by the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility during attorney disciplinary proceedings are a nondischargeable fine or penalty under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7). The assessment of costs was compensation for actual pecuniary loss and was discharged in debtor’s Chapter 7 case.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts criminal restitution from discharge when it serves the state's penal goals and is paid to a court clerk, even if the funds later go to the victim.

Browning v. Dixon Bank (In Re Browning) · filed 2011-06-22(a)(7)

Even though the funds may be transmitted to a different entity at a later point in time, this does not change the fact that the funds are paid to a governmental entity. To conclude, this debt was not discharged in the Plaintiffs bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts criminal court costs from discharge.

Lopez v. First Judicial District of Pennsylvania (In re Lopez) · filed 2012-07-18(a)(7)

The unanimous weight of appellate authority supports the conclusion that the court costs of a criminal proceeding may not be discharged. Each circuit court which has ruled on this express question— that is, whether criminal court costs are excepted from discharge under § 523(a)(7) — has held that such costs are non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except civil restitution from discharge when the award benefits consumers and yields no pecuniary gain to the government.

Commonwealth v. Styer (In re Styer) · filed 2012-08-27(a)(7)

Because the restitution award did not yield pecuniary gains to the Commonwealth, it is not exempt from discharge under section 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts civil penalties payable to and benefiting a governmental unit from discharge, but does not except restitution directed to consumers.

Steffy v. Arkansas ex rel. McDaniel (In re Steffy) · filed 2012-11-21(a)(7)

Under the applicable standards of this doctrine, and the inquiry this Court is directed to make under Section 523(a)(7) regarding the nature of the award in question, the Court concludes that the relief awarded by the state court in reference to its assessment of $1,050,000.00 against Debtor meets the above requirements of Section 523(a)(7), and same constitutes civil penalties subject to exception from discharge. ... Although such an award may serve to advance enforcement by deterrence, the restitution is not “payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit,” and, therefore, does not come within the exception of Section 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts from discharge a civil penalty payable to a governmental unit when the penalty does not compensate an actual pecuniary loss.

Wiebe v. Kansas Department of Labor (In re Wiebe) · filed 2013-01-25(a)(7)

Because the § 44-532(d) penalty is non-compensatory and payable to a governmental unit, it should be excepted from the debtors’ discharge. The Department is therefore entitled to summary judgment.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a contempt award payable directly to private litigants from discharge, even if it vindicates a court’s authority.

Tipsey McStumbles, LLC v. Griffin (In re Griffin) · filed 2013-05-10(a)(7)

Even if this is true under the totality of the circumstances, the debt is not “payable to a governmental unit”; rather it is payable directly to the Plaintiffs. Therefore, I find the debt does not fall within the scope of § 523(a)(7)’s exception to discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except restitution from discharge when it is payable to an individual victim or strictly calculated from the victim’s damages.

Heitmanis v. Rayes (In re Rayes) · filed 2013-07-16(a)(7)

As such, Kelly should be interpreted narrowly, and further, necessary elements of § 523(a)(7) are negated if either (a) the penalty is payable to the individual victim, who is not a governmental unit; or (b) the penalty is strictly calculated in the sum of the victim’s incurred damages.

Section 523(a)(7) covers parking tickets as fines or penalties payable to a governmental unit.

In re Ezell · filed 2013-08-07(a)(7)

As fines or penalties payable to a governmental unit, parking tickets are within 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a state penalty for fraudulently obtained unemployment benefits from discharge when the penalty punishes fraud rather than compensates the state for its loss.

Minnesota Department of Employment & Economic Development v. Sanderson (In re Sanderson) · filed 2014-04-11(a)(7)

As such, the penalty assessed by the Department for the overpaid unemployment benefits received by Mr. Sanderson is excepted from discharge under section 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except state intervention fees from discharge when they compensate the state for services rather than punish the debtor.

In re Miller · filed 2014-05-15(a)(7)

The Court holds that the intervention fees imposed on Mr. Miller do not constitute a “fine, penalty or forfeiture” since the purpose of imposing the fees is not penal in nature. In addition, the intervention fees are intended by the State of Missouri to compensate the State for its actual pecuniary losses in providing services to assist Mr. Miller.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts costs imposed as part of a state criminal sentence from discharge if they benefit a governmental unit and do not compensate for actual pecuniary loss, regardless of whether they were intended as punishment.

Lopez v. First Judicial District of Pennsylvania (In Re Lopez) · filed 2014-07-11(a)(7)

First, every cost imposed as part of a state criminal sentence (subject only to the “two qualifying phrases” in § 523(a)(7) that the cost “be both ‘to and for the benefit of a governmental unit,’ and ‘not compensation for actual pecuniary loss’”) is exempt from discharge in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, regardless of whether the intention of the sentencing court in imposing the cost, or of the state legislature in authorizing or requiring the cost to be imposed, was to punish the offender.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a governmental fine from discharge when it is penal rather than compensation for an actual pecuniary loss.

Cook v. Camden City Municipal Court (In re Cook) · filed 2015-03-17(a)(7)

All three (3) requirements of § 523(a)(7) are present, thus it has proven that the subject debt was excepted from the- Debtor’s chapter 7 discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) excepted the traffic-ticket debts from discharge in this case.

Branch v. 30th District Court City of Highland Park (In re Branch) · filed 2015-02-06(a)(7)

The Court concludes that under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7), all debts owed to Defendant based on the Citation, or based on any of the 2012 traffic tickets listed in Debtor’s Schedule E, are nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except probation supervision fees from discharge when they compensate a government for its actual supervision costs.

Lopez v. First Judicial District (In re Lopez) · filed 2015-05-18(a)(7)

Accordingly, they are subject to the proviso in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) that the debt not be compensation for the relevant governmental unit’s actual pecuniary loss. Here they are. As a consequence, the fees are a dischargeable debt.

Whether a penalty benefits a governmental unit under § 523(a)(7) must be assessed in light of the applicable appropriations act and fiscal budget.

New Jersey v. Moran-Hernandez (In re Moran-Hernandez) · filed 2016-02-02(a)(7)

In light of the foregoing, the Court finds that although N.J.S.A. §§ 34:15-79 and 34:15-120.10... permit the use of a small portion of penalties collected to cover administrative expenses incurred in connection with distributing benefits to workers’ compensation claimants, whether those amounts are “for the benefit of a governmental unit” must be considered in conjunction with the Appropriations Act and the associated fiscal budget for the appropriate year.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts state criminal restitution from discharge even when it compensates a victim or insurer for actual loss.

Auto-Owners Insurance v. Smith · filed 2016-03-01(a)(7)

Because the Supreme Court has decided that the principle of federalism must be respected, and that state-ordered criminal restitution meets the exception provided by Congress in § 523(a)(7), the United States Bankruptcy Court’s decision to the contrary will be reversed.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except county pay-to-stay charges from discharge when they compensate the county for incarceration costs.

County of Dakota v. Milan (In re Milan) · filed 2016-03-01(a)(7)

Accordingly, the Incarceration Costs are compensation for actual pecuniary loss within the meaning of § 523(a)(7). As such, they are dischargeable and were discharged.

Section 523(a)(2)(A) covers a statutory fraud penalty owed to a government agency even when the penalty also falls under § 523(a)(7).

Michigan Unemployment Insurance Agency v. Kozlowski (In re Kozlowski) · filed 2016-03-25(a)(2)(A)

But the same problem does not exist in this case, where the Court holds that both § 523(a)(2)(A) and § 523(a)(7) cover the fraud penalty at issue.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a compensatory attorney-client fee arbitration award payable to the client from discharge.

Scheer v. State · filed 2016-04-14(a)(7)

On its face, section 523(a)(7) does not apply to Scheer’s debt, as it is neither “a fine, penalty, or forfeiture” nor “payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit.”

Section 523(a)(7) does not except Michigan case evaluation costs from discharge because they compensate the opposing party rather than impose a penalty.

Wayne County v. Newell (In re Newell) · filed 2016-07-26(a)(7)

The case evaluation costs awarded under Michigan Court Rule 2.403(0) cannot be fairly characterized as a “penalty” as that term is used in section 523(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(7) does not except incarceration charges from discharge when their purpose is to reimburse the county rather than punish the debtor.

County of Dakota v. Milan · filed 2016-09-22(a)(7)

Upon our de novo review we conclude that the bankruptcy court committed no error in its determination that the Incarceration Costs are subject to discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) bars discharge of a bail bondsman’s forfeiture debt even when a surety pays the state and seeks reimbursement.

Financial Casualty & Surety Co. v. Thayer · filed 2016-10-03(a)(7)

In short, bail bond forfeiture judgments entered against a bail bondsman cannot, in any fashion, be discharged in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts restitution imposed as part of a state criminal sentence from discharge.

Mills v. Caisse (In re Caisse) · filed 2017-02-21(a)(7)

The Restitution Order falls squarely within the broad rule established in Kelly because it was imposed as part of .a state criminal sentence.

Section 523(a)(7) makes criminal restitution orders nondischargeable even when state law separately provides for a restitution fine.

Armstrong v. Kaplon · filed 2017-02-22(a)(7)

This argument is squarely precluded by Kelly, which categorically held that criminal restitution orders are nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts criminal restitution from discharge when it serves a state’s penal and rehabilitative interests, even if victims ultimately receive the payments.

Billy Dampier, Jr. v. United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado · filed 2017-04-11(a)(7)

We find Dampier’s restitution debt is excepted from discharge under § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a penalty from discharge when its proceeds benefit injured workers rather than a governmental unit.

In re Hansen · filed 2017-11-14(a)(7)

Under Towers and Moran-Hernandez, this generalized benefit does not qualify as a penalty payable for the benefit of a governmental unit. Accordingly, the debt does not fall within § 523(a)(7)’s exception to discharge and is dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(7) prevents discharge of a restitution obligation imposed as part of a state criminal sentence.

Medical Lien Management v. Dampier · filed 2018-02-14(a)(7)

Because the restitution obligation arose from the criminal sentence, Kelly and Troff apply and § 523(a)(7) precluded discharge of Mr. Dampier’s restitution obligation.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a governmental penalty from discharge when it is penal in nature and does not compensate an actual pecuniary loss.

In re Loy · filed 2018-04-26(a)(7)

The obligation the Department was attempting to collect from the debtor satisfies all of the requirements of § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) makes attorney fee awards under Colorado’s consumer protection and debt collection statutes nondischargeable when they serve as civil penalties payable to the government.

State of Colorado v. Robert J. Hopp & Associates, LLC · filed 2018-05-17(a)(7)

A debt is not dischargeable, however, for “a fine, penalty, or forfeiture payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit, and is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss, other than a tax penalty.” 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) (2012). ... Thus, we conclude that the trial court’s attorney fees awards made under the CCPA and the CFDCPA are not dischargeable, and we decline to order that they be vacated as void under 11 U.S.C. § 524.

Section 523(a)(13) excepts federal criminal restitution from discharge, while subsections (a)(4) and (a)(6) except a related civil judgment when the debt meets their misconduct requirements.

Explorer Pipeline Company v. Meadows · filed 2019-03-04(a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(13)

Based on Defendant’s admissions, the Court finds that 1) the debt to Plaintiff resulting from the Judgment in the Criminal Action is not discharged pursuant to § 523(a)(13); and 2) the debt to Plaintiff based ... on the judgment in the State Court Action is not discharged pursuant to § 523(a)(4) and (a)(6).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a debt for a governmental civil penalty from discharge.

Benkovitch v. Village of Key Biscayne, Florida · filed 2019-06-20(a)(7)

And because that claim is a for a “penalty” imposed by a “governmental unit,” it is not dischargeable in bankruptcy. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except unpaid service fees from discharge as a fine or penalty when no fine or penalty was assessed before discharge.

Craig Ashley Jenkins and Amber Joy Jenkins · filed 2019-11-04(a)(7)

In summary, the Court finds that the prepetition debt owed by the Debtors to the Defendant was a general unsecured debt for solid waste collection services which was not excepted from discharge as a fine or penalty under § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except civil restitution claims from discharge.

Executive Office of Health & Human Services v. Kupperstein · filed 2019-10-24(a)(7)

With respect to the restitution award, I find that Code § 523(a)(7) does not apply to civil restitution claims.

Section 523(a)(7) can except a penalty from discharge even when the underlying debt is dischargeable.

State of Colorado, Division of Finance & Procureme v. Martinez · filed 2019-11-01(a)(7)

Under Section 523(a)(7), penalties may be nondischargeable even if there is no other underlying nondischargeable debt.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts from discharge civil penalties owed to the United States that do not compensate for actual pecuniary loss.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. The Mortgage Law Group, LLP · filed 2019-11-04(a)(7)

These amounts represent civil penalties owed to the United States pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 5565(c) and are not compensation for actual pecuniary loss and, therefore, are not subject to discharge under the Bankruptcy Code pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts noncompensatory governmental penalties from an individual debtor’s discharge, but does not apply in corporate Chapter 11 cases.

In re: Exide Technologies, LLC · filed 2020-03-24(a)(7)

The Bankruptcy Court correctly determined that the discharge exception applicable to the District’s claim is § 523(a)(7), which applies to non-compensatory penalties levied by a government agency. The Bankruptcy Court further correctly determined that § 523(a)(7) does not apply in corporate chapter 11 cases.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts State Bar disciplinary costs from discharge, but permits discharge of discovery sanctions payable to a private party for its actual expenses.

Albert-Sheridan v. State Bar of California · filed 2020-06-10(a)(7)

Section 523(a)(7) expressly requires three elements for a debt to be non-dischargeable. The debt must (1) be a fine, penalty, or forfeiture; (2) be payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit; and (3) not constitute compensation for actual pecuniary costs. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7). Here, the discovery sanctions plainly do not satisfy the last two of these elements and, thus, are not excepted from discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) covers municipal motor vehicle fines, which are dischargeable upon successful completion of a Chapter 13 plan.

Alexander Moss, Jr. - Adversary Proceeding · filed 2020-06-17(a)(7)

Municipal court fines fall within the definition of § 523(a)(7), and as such are dischargeable in a chapter 13 bankruptcy case if the case proves successful.

Section 523(a)(7) makes a debt to a governmental unit nondischargeable when its primary purpose is penal, even if the amount reflects money the government paid.

BUONO v. CITY OF NEWARK · filed 2020-09-28(a)(7)

The Court finds that the City has proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the statute’s primary purpose is penal and, therefore, the Debt is not compensation for an actual pecuniary loss. The Debt, accordingly, is not dischargeable through bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts punitive blight fines from discharge, but not remediation costs that compensate a government for its actual loss.

Norton v. Town of South Windsor · filed 2020-09-30(a)(7)

Under the plain meaning of the text of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7), those remediation costs that are tied directly to actual pecuniary loss suffered by a governmental unit and that are secondary to other punitive flat-rate fines, are not the type of debt protected from a bankruptcy discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a governmental penalty from discharge when the government uses the proceeds to fund its obligations, even if third parties receive the resulting payments.

State of Wisconsin v. Hansen · filed 2021-01-08(a)(7)

The penalties thus satisfy all elements of 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(7) and are not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(7) treats costs imposed in attorney disciplinary proceedings as a nondischargeable penalty, even when measured by prosecution expenses.

Osicka, Tim v. Office of Lawyer Regulation · filed 2021-03-24(a)(7)

In light of Zarynski and the numerous cases that have extended its logic to attorney discipline cases, the court concludes that § 523(a)(7) applies, and that the assessment of costs is a non-dischargeable penalty.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a punitive debt from discharge when it is payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit and does not compensate for actual pecuniary loss.

United States v. Benfield · filed 2021-04-28(a)(7)

As such, the Consent Judgment debt is a nondischargeable debt pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) can allow a Chapter 7 discharge to eliminate liability for a civil penalty.

United States v. Serenity Group of Ohio Floral Hills Memory Gardens · filed 2021-04-13(a)(7)

Defendant Downey is not liable for the civil penalty because of his Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a disbarred attorney’s debt to reimburse a state bar client security fund from discharge when the debt serves punishment and rehabilitation rather than compensation for actual pecuniary loss.

Kassas v. The State Bar of California · filed 2021-06-14(a)(7)

the Client Security Fund debt is a fine payable to a governmental unit that is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss. Therefore, the debt is non-dischargeable under § 523(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts civil penalties owed to the government that do not compensate actual pecuniary loss from discharge.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. The Mortgage Law Group, LLP · filed 2022-08-01(a)(7)

These amounts represent civil penalties owed to the United States pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 5565(c) and are not compensation for actual pecuniary loss and, therefore, are not subject to discharge under the Bankruptcy Code pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) bars discharge of a penalty payable to a governmental unit that does not compensate actual pecuniary loss; a federal court’s attorney disciplinary fund qualifies as such a unit.

O'Dwyer v. Carter · filed 2023-05-03(a)(7)

Even if they had been listed, bankruptcy cannot discharge “a fine, penalty, or forfeiture” that is “payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit” and that “is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss.” 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7); see In re Schaffer, 515 F.3d 424, 428 (5th Cir. 2008). O’Dwyer concedes that at least one of the unpaid sanctions was imposed as a “penalty.” That sanction is payable to the Eastern District of Louisiana’s Attorney Disciplinary Fund. O’Dwyer argues that this sanction is dischargeable because the disciplinary fund does not “actually exist[]” as a “government unit.” Yet the Eastern District’s rules show otherwise.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts government penalties that are not compensation for actual pecuniary loss from discharge.

Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection v. Consumer Advocacy Center Inc. · filed 2023-07-07(a)(7)

The civil penalty imposed by the Order represents penalties paid to the United States Government and the States, respectively, is not compensation for actual pecuniary loss, and, thus, as to the Defendant Wen, are not subject to discharge under the Bankruptcy Code under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) makes a civil penalty payable to a governmental unit, along with prejudgment interest on that penalty, nondischargeable.

Corey S. Ribotsky · filed 2023-12-21(a)(7)

The $1,000,000 penalty plus prejudgment interest on that penalty are penalties payable to the SEC, a governmental unit, and fit squarely into the category of debts defined by section 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) does not except a separate civil judgment compensating a creditor from discharge merely because a related criminal restitution order exists.

HATHIRAMANI v. NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL · filed 2024-07-02(a)(7)

Based on these considerations, the Court finds that the June 2004 Judgment is not excepted from discharge under § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a governmental penalty for frivolous litigation from discharge even when the award is measured by the government's actual expenses.

El Dorado County v. Harrington · filed 2024-11-08(a)(7)

It follows that the cumulative § 1038 award of $192,672.85 is excepted from discharge by virtue of § 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(7) excepts a noncompensatory penalty from discharge only to the extent it is payable to and for the benefit of a governmental unit; the debt’s ultimate recipient controls whether it is payable to that unit.

(BK) In Re: Ernesto & Marilyn Patacsil · filed 2024-12-16(a)(7)

As In re Stevens and In re Dickerson demonstrate, the end recipient of the debt dictates its dischargeability under section 523(a)(7).

Section 523(a)(13) excepts criminal restitution orders from bankruptcy discharge.

United States v. W. James Pickett, III · filed 2013-01-29(a)(13)

Although Pickett’s restitution was a debt he owed at the time he declared bankruptcy, a criminal restitution order is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(7) excepts fines and penalties owed to the United States from bankruptcy discharge.

United States v. Bayley · filed 2023-04-26(a)(7)

Mr. Bayley also argues any civil penalty was discharged when he declared bankruptcy. (Dkt. No. 195 at 6.) However, Mr. Bayley does not provide legal authority to support his contention that a civil penalty under the CWA would be subject to discharge. See 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) (exempting from discharge fines and penalties owed to the United States).

Section 523(a)(1)(A) excepts income taxes from Chapter 7 discharge when the return was due within the applicable three-year lookback period.

Imarah v. Comm'r · filed 2008-05-20(a)(1)(A)

Thus, if the IRS has a claim for taxes for which a return was due within 3 years before the bankruptcy petition was filed (the 3-year lookback period), the claim is not dischargeable in a chapter 7 bankruptcy case under 11 U.S.C. section 523(a)(1)(A).

Section 523(a)(1)(A) excepts qualifying tax debts from discharge whether or not the creditor filed a claim in the bankruptcy case.

Hosack v. Internal Revenue Service · filed 2008-05-02(a)(1)(A)

Thus, pertinent to this matter, a Chapter 7 discharge does not serve to discharge a debtor from liability for delinquent income tax that was unassessed at the time the debtor filed for bankruptcy but still assessable by law, regardless of whether the IRS filed a claim in the debtor’s bankruptcy case.

Section 523(a)(1)(B)(ii) excepts a tax debt from discharge when the debtor files the required return late and within two years before filing for bankruptcy.

Pizzuto v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Pizzuto) · filed 2008-03-20(a)(1)(B)(ii)

Pursuant to the statute, a debtor’s tax liability is excepted from discharge if the tax return was filed after its due date, and the tax return was filed within two years of the filing of the bankruptcy petition.

Section 523(a)(1)(A) excepts income tax debt from discharge when the return was due within three years before the bankruptcy petition.

Copley v. West Virginia State Tax Department (In Re Copley) · filed 2008-03-13(a)(1)(A)

Here, the Debtor’s tax return for 1993 was due on April 15, 1994, which is less than three years before the filing of the Debtor’s February 26, 1997 bankruptcy petition. Therefore, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 507(a)(8)(A)(i) and 523(a)(1)(A), the taxes due from 1993 are not subject to discharge.

Section 523(a)(1)(C) excepts a tax debt from discharge when the debtor willfully attempts to evade or defeat the tax.

Internal Revenue Service v. Jones (In re Jones) · filed 2008-01-07(a)(1)(C)

Accordingly, this Court finds that there are sufficient facts in the record to support the Bankruptcy Court’s findings that the Joneses did not willfully attempt in any manner to evade or defeat the 1993 tax assessment and that their tax debt for that year should not be excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(C).

Section 523(a)(1)(C) excepts tax debts from discharge when a debtor willfully attempts to evade or defeat the taxes through acts or omissions.

United States v. Swenson (In Re Swenson) · filed 2008-01-09(a)(1)(C)

The United States has met its burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, that debtors’ federal tax liabilities for tax year 1993 through 2004 (as set forth in the IRS’s Proof of Claim) should be excepted from discharge to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(C) because they willfully attempted to evade or defeat such taxes by their acts and omissions.

Section 523(a)(1)(C) excepts a tax debt from discharge when a debtor willfully takes affirmative steps to evade or defeat tax collection; failure to pay alone is insufficient.

Zimmerman v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Zimmerman) · filed 2008-01-18(a)(1)(C)

Zimmerman’s conduct -- failure to pay taxes knowing they were owed while supporting a lifestyle of oceanfront living and luxury cars, together with very substantial intra-family transfers and transfers to Montifinese for no consideration -- readily satisfies section 523(a)(1)(c)’s conduct requirement. ... The evidence shows Zimmerman acted “voluntarily, consciously or knowingly, and intentionally” for purposes of satisfying section 523(a)(1)(C)’s willfulness requirement.

Under the pre-2005 version of § 523(a)(1)(B)(i), a tax debt is not discharged if the debtor did not file a required return, even if the IRS prepared a substitute return.

In Re Driscoll · filed 2008-01-03(a)(1)(B)(i)

Here, applicable legislative history supports the IRS’ position that, under Section 523(a)(1)(B), the “required ... return” must have been “filed” by the debtor for the relevant tax debt to be dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(1)(A) excepts tax debts that qualify as priority claims from bankruptcy discharge.

Michael v. Severo and Georgina C. Severo v. Commissioner · filed 2007-11-15(a)(1)(A)

Generally, under Bankruptcy Code section 523(a)(1)(A) tax liabilities of a debtor in bankruptcy that qualify as priority claims under Bankruptcy Code section 507(a)(7) will be excepted from discharge and will remain liabilities of the debtor in bankruptcy after the bankruptcy proceeding is concluded.

Section 523(a)(1)(B)(i) excepts a tax debt from discharge when the debtor was required to file a return but did not.

Hicks v. Missouri Department of Revenue (In Re Hicks) · filed 2007-11-07(a)(1)(B)(i)

For the reasons stated above, the Bankruptcy Court did not err in concluding that the Defendants’ claims and liens for unpaid taxes are valid and nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(B).

Section 523(a)(1)(C) excepts tax debts from discharge when the debtor’s conduct and intent show a willful attempt to evade or defeat the taxes.

Volpe v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Volpe) · filed 2007-10-23(a)(1)(C)

With both the conduct element and the mental state requirement met, the court concludes that the debtor willfully attempted to evade or defeat his tax obligations for the years 1997, 1998, and 1999, and that his tax debt for those years is non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(1)(B)(i) excepts a tax debt from discharge when the debtor fails to file a required return or give an equivalent report or notice.

Shorton v. Massachusetts (In Re Shorton) · filed 2007-09-06(a)(1)(B)(i)

Moreover, the Court finds that the Debtor failed to submit any documents that could purport to be a return or an equivalent report or notice, let alone a document executed under penalty of perjury.

Section 523(a)(1)(A) excepts an individual Chapter 11 debtor’s postpetition income tax debts from discharge.

In Re Shin · filed 2004-02-13(a)(1)(A)

Nondischargeability of postpetition income tax claims flows from 11 U.S.C. §§ 507(a)(8)(A), 523(a)(1), and 1141(d)(2).

Section 523(a)(1)(C) excepts tax debt from discharge when a debtor willfully attempts to evade or defeat taxes through acts or culpable omissions.

Wilbert v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Wilbert) · filed 2001-03-20(a)(1)(C)

Given the inclusion of the phrase “in any manner” in § 523(a)(1)(C), the Court feels compelled to consider both Mr. Wilbert’s acts and his omissions.

Section 523(a)(1)(B)(ii) excepts tax debts from discharge when the debtor's earlier filings lack enough information to count as returns and adequate returns are filed late, within two years before bankruptcy.

Mulcahy v. United States (In Re Mulcahy) · filed 2001-03-08(a)(1)(B)(ii)

Because the 1988 and 1989 Form 1040s submitted by the Debtor to the IRS in 1989 and 1990 do not satisfy the test derived from Germantown Trust and Zeller-bach Paper, the operative date for the filing of the returns for purposes of § 523(a)(1)(B) is June 3, 1993 when the Debtor filed adequate returns from which the IRS made assessments for the years in question.

Section 523(a)(1)(B) treats post-assessment Forms 1040 that merely repeat IRS assessments and serve no tax purpose as nonreturns unless the debtor shows an honest and reasonable effort to comply.

Hetzler v. United States (In Re Hetzler) · filed 2001-03-12(a)(1)(B)

Applying what appears to be the weight of authority, at least on the Court of Appeals level, to this case, I conclude that, as a matter of law, the IRS has met its burden to establish that the 1040 forms filed by the debtor in 1997, for the tax years 1988 through 1991, did not represent an honest and reasonable attempt to comply with tax laws, and do not constitute “returns” for § 523 purposes. The forms were filed three years after the IRS issued assessments for the years in question, and substantially mirrored the information in the assessments. The returns served no tax purpose and had no effect under the Internal Revenue Code.

Section 523(a)(1)(B)(i) excepts tax debt from discharge when a required return was not filed; an unsigned return does not count as filed.

Waugh v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Waugh) · filed 2001-02-28(a)(1)(B)(i)

The court concludes as a matter of law that an unsigned return is not “filed” for purposes of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(l)(B)(i).

Section 523(a)(1)(B)(i) makes tax debts nondischargeable when the debtor files returns only after the IRS has assessed the taxes using substitute returns.

Olson v. United States, Internal Revenue Service (In Re Olson) · filed 2001-02-22(a)(1)(B)(i)

The Debtor did not file an actual return for the years in question until the Government had already made the assessments. Based on the foregoing, and having heard argument of counsel and reviewed the record, this Court is satisfied that the Government’s position is well taken and the tax liabilities of the Debtor as determined by the SFR for the years in question are within the exception to discharge pursuant to Section 523(a)(l)(B)(i).

Section 523(a)(1)(B)(i) excepts tax debts from discharge when a required return was not filed.

Schmidt v. Vermont, Department of Revenue (In re Schmidt) · filed 2001-01-21(a)(1)(B)(i)

Because Mr. Schmidt was domiciled in Vermont during the calendar years 1991 and 1992, he was required by Vermont law to file Vermont income tax returns for those years. His failure to file those returns makes the Vermont taxes owed by him for those years non-dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(1)(C) makes tax debts nondischargeable when a debtor willfully puts available assets beyond the IRS’s reach to evade payment.

United States v. Summers (In Re Summers) · filed 2001-01-11(a)(1)(C)

Instead he has voluntarily, consciously and intentionally chose to allocate those resources to speculative “investments” and other discretionary allotments which have the intended effect of putting his assets beyond the reach of his creditors and the IRS for at least ten years. Such behavior under the Fegeley standard is sufficient to meet the civil willfulness standard and to determine that Summers’ tax liabilities are nondis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(1)(A) does not except New Jersey motor vehicle insurance surcharges from discharge because they are penalties rather than excise taxes.

In Re Marcucci · filed 2000-12-29(a)(1)(A)

The Court finds that the motor vehicle surcharges at issue are not excise taxes within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(8)(E) and will in each of these consolidated cases affirm the Bankruptcy Court’s determination that the surcharges are not non-disehargeable under § 523(a)(1).

Section 523(a)(1) excepts priority tax claims from discharge.

Miller v. United States (In Re Miller) · filed 2000-10-03(a)(1)

Priority tax claims are excepted from discharge under section 523(a).